Exploring Leadership in a Multicultural School

ScholarWorks

Collection

2016

Exploring Leadership in a Multicultural School

Walden University

Follow this and additional works at:https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations

Part of theBilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons,Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons,Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, and theManagement Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please [email protected].

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

This is to certify that the doctoral study by

Sonia Matthew

has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by

the review committee have been made.

Review Committee

Dr. Wallace Southerland, III., Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty Dr. Elizabeth Warren, Committee Member, Education Faculty

Dr. Michael Butcher, University Reviewer, Education Faculty

Chief Academic Officer

Eric Riedel, Ph.D.

Walden University 2016

Exploring Leadership in a Multicultural School by

Sonia A. Matthew

MA, Walden University, 2007 BA, University of Ottawa, 1998

BA, Carleton University, 1997

Dissertation Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Walden University June 2016

The educational problem addressed in this study was the lack of empirical research of the effects of how principal leadership characteristics and style influence the culture of multicultural schools. This qualitative case study identified and explored the leadership strategies used by a reputedly successful principal of a multicultural school. A successful principal was the case being studied. The conceptual framework was anchored in Burns’ transformational leadership theory. Three research questions focused on the principal’s leadership characteristics, the participants’ perceptions of how the principal applied the leadership style, and the influence of the principal’s leadership style on school culture. A principal, an assistant principal, and 8 lead teachers knowledgeable of the principal’s leadership style participated in semistructured interviews. School climate surveys were examined to enhance understanding of school climate under the principal’s leadership. Data analysis strategies included transcribing interview data, thematic development, and data triangulation. Results showed that the principal’s abilities to share decision-making and communicate the school’s vision were important skills. The principal had profound influence on school culture and also shaped how teachers created a safe, nurturing, and stimulating learning environment sensitive to multicultural students. A central

recommendation of the study is that principals in similar settings should build trust and collaboration to create inviting and equitable learning environments for diverse students and their families. This study contributes to positive social change by providing insight that may help current and emerging principals in similar situations lead school personnel in ways that contribute to positive and productive learning environments that ultimately provide increased awareness of diversity and ensure student success.

by

Sonia A. Matthew

MA, Walden University, 2007 BA, University of Ottawa, 1998

BA, Carleton University, 1997

Dissertation Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Walden University June 2016

i

List of Tables ... v

Section 1: The Introduction ... 1

Problem Statement ... 3

Research Questions ... 4

Purpose of the Study ... 5

Conceptual Framework ... 5

Definitions of Terms ... 7

Assumptions, Limitations, Scope, and Delimitations ... 10

Assumptions ... 10

Limitations ... 11

Scope ... 12

Delimitations ... 12

Organization of the Remainder of the Study ... 13

Significance of the Study ... 13

Section 2: Review of the Literature ... 16

Content and Organization of the Review ... 16

Assumptions that Shape the Literature Review ... 17

Strategy Used to Search the Literature ... 17

Literature Related to Principals Shaping School Culture ... 17

Organizational Culture ... 18

Race/Ethnicity and Organizational Culture ... 19

ii

Implications of the Literature ... 25

Literature on Leadership Theories in Education ... 25

Literature on Models of Instructional Leadership ... 26

Collective Learning ... 37

Summary and Implications ... 42

Transformational Leadership ... 45

Analytic Functions of Leadership ... 51

Summary and Implications ... 56

Social-Justice Leadership ... 58

Summary and Implications ... 65

Study Methodology ... 67

Literature on Differing Methodologies ... 68

Section 3: Methodology ... 70

Rationale for Qualitative Research ... 70

Research Questions ... 72

Case-Study Tradition ... 72

Data-Collection Procedures ... 73

Documentary Data ... 74

Semi structured Interviews ... 74

The Interview Protocol ... 76

Steps to Gain Access ... 77

iii

Past and Current Professional Roles and Implications ... 79

Methods to Establish a Researcher–Participant Relationship ... 80

Researcher Bias Related to the Topic ... 80

Data-Analysis Procedures ... 80

Discrepant Data ... 82

Transcription: Analysis of Interviews ... 82

Development of the Individual Case Narrative ... 83

Thematic Development Using the Conceptual Framework ... 83

Methods to Address Trustworthiness ... 84

Triangulation ... 84

Member Checks ... 85

Collegial Review ... 85

Summary ... 86

Section 4: Results ... 87

Case Narrative: The Principal ... 88

Leadership Characteristics ... 89

Factors That Influence Multiculturalism ... 91

Reputation of the Principal as a Leader ... 93

Findings ... 94

Research Question 1 ... 94

Research Question 2 ... 98

iv

Evidence of Quality ... 109

Summary ... 110

Section 5: Overview, Conclusions, and Recommendations ... 112

Overview ... 112

Interpretation of Findings: The Conclusions ... 113

Conclusion 1 ... 113

Conclusion 2 ... 117

Conclusion 3 ... 119

Practical Applications of This Study ... 120

Implications for Social Change ... 121

Recommendations for Action ... 122

Recommendation 1 ... 122

Recommendation 2 ... 123

Recommendation 3 ... 123

Recommendations for Further Study ... 124

Researcher’s Reflection ... 125

Conclusion ... 126

References ... 128

Appendix A: Interview Protocol For Principal ... 179

Appendix B: Interview Protocol for School Personnel ... 180

Appendix C: Letter to Director for Research and Development ... 181

v List of Tables

Section 1: The Introduction

The appointment of principals in largely multicultural elementary schools is increasing, yet little is known about the impact of their leadership practices on school climate (Furman, 2012; Jackson & Marriott, 2012; Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2012; Pitre, 2014; Planty, Provasnik, Hussar, & Snyder, 2007; Urick & Bowers, 2014). The

leadership practices of principals in multicultural elementary schools may have a significant influence on school climate. Empirical investigations of impact on school climate in general are limited. Empirically grounded research is necessary to understand fully the ways principals influence and shape culture in largely multicultural elementary schools.

This study will fill a current gap in the literature by providing a qualitative research study demonstrating the effects of leadership on one multicultural elementary school. Although current literature describes principal leadership of diverse schools (Capper, 2015; Davis, Gooden, & Micheaux, 2015; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Green, 2015; Kinney, 2009; Marsh & Desai, 2012; McGrady & Reynolds, 2013;

Murtadha, 2009; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Richardson, 2010; Santamaría, 2014; Sperandio & LaPier, 2009), studies do not delineate how leadership should be facilitated to meet the needs of a diverse student body. The race of the principal is rarely specified as being different from that of the school community (Capper, 2015; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Green, 2015; Kinney, 2009; Murtadha, 2009; Richardson, 2010; Sperandio & LaPier, 2009; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011). The specification of racial identity of the principal and the school community may or may not affect leadership practices and how members of the school community create and sustain its culture.

Research on urban schools shows consistently that multicultural schools experience numerous challenges (Brown, Benkovitz, Muttillo, & Urban, 2011; Cuban, 2001; Davis et al., 2015; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Harvey, 2003; Holme, Diem, & Welton, 2013; Kraft et al., 2015; McCray & Beachum, 2011; National Task Force on the Future of Urban Districts, 2002; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011).

Urban schools commonly lack quality learning, so principals of urban schools “need to develop expertise in communicating the unique characteristics of their schools that suffer when schools are ranked and compared against criteria that fail to account for the unique challenges of their community” (Portin, 2000, p. 503). Researchers on

effective schools (Barth, 1990; Edmonds, 1979; Goldring, Mavrogordato, & Taylor Haynes, 2015; Murtadha, 2009; Purkey & Smith, 1983; Rigby, 2014; Sebastian &

Allensworth, 2012; Sperandio & LaPier, 2009; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Witziers, Bosker, & Krüger, 2003) indicated that the most important catalyst for school reform and success is the instructional leader; therefore, it is important that principals of multicultural schools understand the role of leadership and the relationship of leadership to school culture. Although all principals need to know about leadership in general, understanding and practicing cultural proficiency through the exercise of leadership may impact the effectiveness of leadership of multicultural elementary schools (Combs, 2002; Green, 2015; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Santamaría, 2014; Terrell & Lindsey, 2008; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011; Thomas, 2008; B. L. Young, Madsen, & Young, 2010).

The remaining sections of this study focus on the importance of the roles of principals in leadership and how these roles influence the culture of the multicultural elementary schools they lead. This study examined, through a qualitative case study, one

multicultural elementary school located in the greater Washington, DC area. The school principal and teachers in the school took part in interviews designed to obtain insight into the local issue. Additional discussion on the local issue follows in Section 2.

Problem Statement

The leadership styles and influence of principals leading multicultural elementary schools in urban settings was the focus of this doctoral research study. The research was completed in an urban school district in the greater Washington, DC metropolitan area. The research centered on leadership practices and influence of principals leading multicultural elementary schools, as well as how principals’ leadership practices shape and influence the climate in multicultural elementary schools. Examining the issue of the leadership implications of principals leading multicultural schools in general, and in the research setting in particular, was a worthy investigation for several reasons.

First, although students of color comprise 40% of children nationwide, the number of leaders of color remains low (Snyder, Dillow, & Hoffman, 2009). Given that 11% of school administrators are “non-Hispanic Multicultural,” and 7% are Hispanic (Snyder et al., 2009), it may be reasonable to assume that the leadership of chief

administrators in largely multicultural schools is not commonly explored, thereby making the phenomenon a salient topic for exploration.

Second, with only scarce research on principals’ leadership of and influence in largely multicultural elementary schools, the perspective from which the principals operate may be narrow or limited because of insufficient understanding of the social, familial, and cultural experiences and mores of the dominant faculty and student demographic (Brown et al., 2011; McCray & Beachum, 2011; Ryan, 2003). Often,

principals’ language, interaction style, customs, values, attitudes, and religious beliefs differ from those of their multicultural students and stakeholders, which may interfere with effective communication and leadership (Khalifa, 2012; Kraft et al., 2015; Ryan, 2003; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011). Consequently, principals responsible for leading largely multicultural schools may have much to learn about the nature of their students and communities.

Third, administrators may not be conscious of the privileges they have as a result of their race; therefore, they may not understand how students of color and their families experience life in urban schools and communities (Capper, 2015; Davis et al., 2015; Kailin, 2002; Tirozzi, 2000). Therefore given Kailin’s (2002) and Tirozzi’s (2000) research on this subject, it seems that principals’ limited understanding of students’ cultural and life experiences may have unanticipated consequences and negative effects on multicultural students’ academic performance, staff and faculty attitudes (particularly multicultural staff and faculty), and student and familial relations.

Given the salience of the topic, examining the leadership practices and influence of a principal in a multicultural elementary school enhances and extends existing

literature and the practice of principal leadership. This information aids in identifying, exploring, and clarifying principals’ impact on students and familial relations, staff and faculty, diversity issues, and the overall organizational climate of the learning

environment.

Research Questions

Research Question 1: What are the leadership characteristics of a reputedly successful principal in a multicultural school?

Research Question 2: How does a reputedly successful principal shape and influence the culture of a multicultural school?

Research Question 3: How do school personnel define and characterize the leadership style of a reputedly successful principal of a multicultural school?

Purpose of the Study

The study has multiple purposes. The first purpose of this qualitative study was to explore and understand how a reputedly successful principal defined his or her leadership style in a multicultural elementary school. Second, this study gained understanding about how school building staff and faculty defined and described the leadership practices of a reputedly successful principal in a multicultural school. Third, this study explored how a reputedly successful principal shaped the values and norms of a multicultural school.

Conceptual Framework

Qualitative investigators often use a conceptual framework as a theoretical lens or perspective to guide research and raise questions related to a phenomenon (Creswell, 2003). In general, transformational leadership provides intellectual direction and innovation in an organization while empowering and supporting members in decision making (Balyer, 2012; Burns, 1978; Conley & Goldman, 1994; Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002; Jackson & Marriott, 2012; Leithwood, 1994; Neumerski, 2012; O’Malley & Capper, 2015; Price, 2012; Silins, Mulford, Zarins, & Bishop, 2000). Transformational leadership replaces hierarchical and procedural notions of leadership with a model of shared instructional leadership by seeking to raise participants’ level of commitment to

the organization (Dvir et al., 2002; Kraft et al., 2015; Leithwood, 1994; Neumerski, 2012; Thoonen et al., 2011). Consequently, in this study, the focus on transformational

leadership applies to the school principal as a change agent who motivates staff to become active participants in promoting a positive culture in largely multicultural elementary school settings.

Transformational leadership theory is an appropriate basis for the conceptual framework of this study for at least two broad reasons. First, transformational leadership theory is well suited to explore challenges and meet the uncertainty of change that may come about, for example, in multicultural elementary schools. Second, as principals continue to lead multicultural schools, analytic functions of transformational leadership approaches will allow organizational issues to be examined appropriately, productively, and equitably.

In transformational leadership theory, positive school culture, facilitated by the school principal, emerged as a broad category from the literature. Leaders provide

positive climate-centered leadership through the three analytic functions of articulation of vision, shared leadership, and raising the motivation and commitment of the group. Transformational leaders articulate vision by working with others in the school community to identify personal goals and connect individual goals to broader

organizational goals (Balyer, 2012; Barth, 1990; Hicks, Pitre, & Charles, 2012; Lambert, 2005; Sebastian & Allensworth, 2012). Shared leadership focuses on problem

identification, problem solving, and collaboration with stakeholders to improve organizational performance (Darling-Hammond, 1988; Fullan, 2002a; Goldring et al., 2015; Hallinger, 1992b; Khalifa, 2012; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015). Leaders develop the

motivation and commitment of the group by encouraging group members to reach their fullest potential (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Price, 2012; Terosky, 2014; Urick & Bowers, 2014), and to support them in transcending their own

self-interests for a larger good (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Kraft et al., 2015; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; Leithwood, Tomlinson, & Genge, 1996; Neumerski, 2012; Sagor & Barnett, 1994; Silins et al., 2000).

For this investigation, the three analytic functions of articulation of vision, shared leadership, and raising the commitment and motivation of the group served as the

conceptual framework to examine the influence of principals leading multicultural elementary schools in a school district in the greater Washington, DC area.

I used the conceptual framework to refine the research questions and sharpen the focus of the study; to develop interview protocols to ensure plausible data were collected; to sort, classify, and analyze textual and other data once collected; and to develop

conclusions and research for future study. Because education communities expect principals to carry out leadership practices that facilitate positive climates, the utility of transformational leadership theory to examine the leadership practices of principals leading multicultural elementary schools was appropriate. In Section 2, I will review and analyze the broader literature on theoretical leadership models and comprehensively describe the analytic functions of transformational leadership theory.

Definitions of Terms

The following definitions of terms were used for this study:

Climate: A set of internal characteristics that distinguishes one school from another and influences the behavior of the people in the school (Fullan, 2005;

Sergiovanni, 2000). School climate consists of the quality and consistency of

interpersonal interactions in the school community that influence children’s cognitive, social, and psychological development. These interactions include those among staff, among students, and between school and home (Cotton, 2003; Haynes, Emmons, & Ben-Avie, 1997).

Cultural proficiency: The esteeming of culture, knowing how to learn about individual and organizational culture, and interacting effectively in a variety of cultural environments (Lindsey, Robins, Nuri, & Terrell, 2003; Terrell & Lindsey, 2008); a way of being that enables individuals and organizations to respond effectively to people who differ from them and the manner in which differences are viewed and encountered positively (Lindsey et al., 2003).

Leadership: Those activities engaged in by an individual or members of a group that contribute significantly to “development and maintenance of role structure and goal direction necessary for effective group performance” (Snowden & Gorton, 2002, p. 69). Leadership focuses on the instruction of students and improving learning outcomes. W. F. Smith and Andrews (1989) defined the leader as someone who is a resource provider, an instructional resource, a communicator, and a visible presence. The school leader defines the mission, manages the curriculum and instruction, and promotes the school climate (Hallinger, 1992a). The manner in which the leader performs is based on a combination of beliefs, values, and preferences, as well as organizational culture and norms that encourage some styles and discourage others (Barth, 1990; Changing Minds.org, 2007; Hallinger & Murphy, 1987a; Murphy, 2002).

Multicultural: Multicultural includes people who indicated their race(s) as

“multicultural,” or of a different culture or race, other than “Caucasian,” such as “African American,” or “Hispanic” (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010).

Race: Race is a concept derived from physical characteristics and socially constructed racial categories, including Asian American, African American, Latino, Hispanic, American Indian, and Caucasian (Gay, 2000; Omi & Winant, 1994). Race consists of socially constructed categories based on physical characteristics and traits used in everyday life and in social and institutional settings, such as school systems, to identify and specify racial groups (Gay, 2000; Katz, 1989; Omi & Winant, 1994).

Reputedly successful: For the purposes of this study, reputedly successful is based on representational data provided by individuals from the school system who are in a position to assess the performance of school principals (S. C. Smith & Piele, 1997). A variety of styles and strategies of leadership, including hierarchical, transformational, and participative, depending on their reading of the leaders themselves, their followers, and the organizational context may determine a principal’s success (Brezicha, Bergmark, & Mitra, 2015; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Donaldson, 2007; DuFour, 2004; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Khalifa, 2012; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; Rigby, 2014; Sebastian & Allensworth, 2012; Spillane, 2005).

School culture: How the environment manifests itself in customs, rituals, symbols, stories, and language (Stoll, 2000). School culture represents the core values and

practices that make the school unique. School culture develops from at least three sources: the social environment of the school, the internal structure, and the action of school leaders over time (Van Houtte, 2005). Culture is passed from one leader to the

next and changes to culture are slow and incremental. School culture spans time and is broader in scope than climate. A leader has a greater chance of influencing climate because it is a function of how individuals in a school feel about their institution. Climate does affect culture over time, and in this way school leaders have a hand in shaping culture over time (Schein, 2004).

Stakeholder: A person or a group of people who have some investment in a program, whether or not actively engaged in operations (Avery, 2005). For example, parents of students attending the school under study are considered stakeholders.

Assumptions, Limitations, Scope, and Delimitations Assumptions

To prevent potential misunderstandings of the research problem, assumptions that have a material bearing on the issue should be “openly and unreservedly set forth” (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001, p. 63). Therefore, the following assumptions are specific to the nature of this study. First, principals may not fully identify with most members of the multicultural school community (Davis et al., 2015; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Lewis, 2001; Mahoney, 1997; McIntyre, 1997; Ryan, 2003; Santamaría, 2014; Shields, 2004). Consequently, principals may not understand cultural proficiency. A second assumption is that participants evaluated principals’ leadership styles based on honest perceptions of school leaders, the assistant principal, and teachers. Third, the conceptual framework chosen for this research study was appropriate to address and explain the topic of principals leading multicultural elementary schools in urban settings, and provide answers to the research questions, which were adequately addressed.

Limitations

Researchers provide limitations to identify potential weaknesses of the study (Creswell, 2003). Limitations identified for this study are the setting, the types of participants and unit of analysis, subjectivity of participants based on self-reported data, and the utility of the conceptual framework.

Setting. The study was limited to one urban school district in the greater

Washington, DC metropolitan area. Although the study was limited to one school district, I applied a purposeful sampling strategy, which involves “selecting individuals and sites for study because they can purposefully inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study” (Creswell, 2003, p. 12).

Types of participants and unit of analysis. The study was also limited by the types of participants invited to participate in the study. Given that individuals act on their perceptions of the realities that surround them (J. A. Hatch, 2002), I sought and obtained information from individuals who have regular contact with the principals and can provide the most information about the leadership styles of principals and the work they do in multicultural elementary schools during the interview processes. Therefore, I limited the types of interview participants to the principal, the assistant principal, and teachers. I confined the unit of analysis to the principal who served as the case for the investigation.

Self-report data. The subjectivity of participants posed another limitation to the study. Subjectivity has been labeled as perhaps the most common concern of qualitative research (Patton, 1990). Researchers label individuals’ subjective evaluations and reports of their thoughts, feelings, behaviors, or experiences as self-report data (A. R. Smith &

Terry, 2006). Probing for specific answers during interviews and collecting documentary data corroborated self-report data to ensure the study was not one-sided.

Utility of the conceptual framework. The utility of the conceptual framework was also a limitation of the study. Transformational leadership theory was the theoretical framework for the study. Although principal leadership may be viewed from various and often competing perspectives, transformational leadership is consistent with the

transformative dimensions of school principals’ leadership styles. The framework also was limited by analytic features (i.e., articulation of vision, motivation of the group, and shared leadership) that I used for data collection and analysis. In summary, the

framework was not designed to capture aspects of principals’ leadership that may be captured by using alternative leadership theories and models.

An additional limitation that emerged was the understanding that multiculturalism is a multi-faceted theme, resulting in a narrow focus.

Scope

The scope of the research identifies precisely what the researcher intends to do (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). The study included an interview with a principal who heads a multicultural elementary school and other members of the leadership team, including an assistant principal and classroom teachers. The study included only the aforementioned individuals, selected because of their familiarity with the principal and knowledge of the leadership practices of the principal.

Delimitations

Delimitations address what the researcher does not intend to do in the study (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). The study was not about all elementary school principals.

Instead, the study was about principals who lead multicultural elementary schools. The study did not include interviews with individuals who have limited familiarity with the principal(s)’ leadership practices or the work the principal(s) does in the local research setting. The study is not about influencing hiring or diversity decisions and I did not seek information on race relations between the principals and the school community. Although race may have arisen as an issue during interviewing, the focus of the study was not restricted to how a principal relates to a school community consisting of mostly multicultural students and perhaps multicultural teachers and other staff members.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

Section 1 presented the introduction, statement of the problem, research questions, purpose of the study, conceptual framework, definition of terms, significance of the study, assumptions, limitations, and delimitations. Section 2 addresses the review of literature and research related to the topic investigated. The methodology and procedures used to gather data for the study appear in Section 3. Sections 4 and 5 provide the findings and analysis that emerged from the study, including a summary of the study, conclusions drawn from the study, and recommendations for further study.

Significance of the Study

The significance of the study establishes a rationale for conducting the study and explains why the results will be important (Creswell, 2003). A study examining the influence of principals’ leadership styles on organizational culture in multicultural elementary schools is significant for several reasons. First, the study is significant because it provides a basis for other school-principal leaders to learn about how their leadership practices might influence the culture of a racially diverse learning environment.

Providing a basis for other school principals to learn how their leadership practices might affect the culture of multicultural schools is significant because a limited number of case studies on school leadership directly address how school principals operate in

multicultural contexts (Larson, 1997; Lewis, 2001; Ryan, 2003; Shields, 2004; Shields, Larocque, & Oberg, 2002). For example, in a study by Ryan (2003), administrators found race insignificant because they aimed to display a “positive image” (p. 150) of

themselves, the school, and the school community. By studying a principal heading a multicultural elementary school, useful information will be available for other principals serving in the same capacity.

Second, the study fills a significant gap in the literature and practice in the

broader area of principal leadership in general, and leadership by principals whose race is different from the dominant racial group of the schools in which they serve, in particular. Several studies described school administrators’ disinterest in discussing or

acknowledging race (Delpit, 1996; Ladson-Billings, 2001; J. McKenzie, 2001; Ryan, 2003). In a literature review conducted by Tillman (2004), the researcher found that same-race affiliation shaped multicultural school leaders’ style of leadership. Principals in multicultural schools demonstrated a commitment to the development of multicultural students and a resistance to the “ideologies and individuals opposed to the education of multicultural students” (p. 131). Generally, existing leadership studies (Ascher & Branch-Smith, 2005; Duke, 1995; J. R. Evans, 2004; A. Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Henze, Katz, & Norte, 2000) showed how multicultural school leaders mediate their own racial identity with students, affecting how they perceive and shape the work they do. A study focusing on how school administrators’ leadership styles influence or do not influence the

culture of multicultural elementary schools adds to the limited literature by focusing on the leadership styles of school leaders whose race is other than the predominant racial makeup of the school community.

Third, the analysis and conclusions, as well as the first hand information drawn from the research, may help school districts design professional development around diverse leadership styles, cultivating and influencing school climate and cultural

sensitivity. Given that the lack of diversity in school leadership presents a dilemma, the broader concern, identified by M. Young and Laible (2000), may be a lack of

understanding of the various manifestations of how race pertains to the administration of schools. Information collected through interviews provided rich data that may inform school districts of the issues surrounding principal leadership and the culture of multicultural elementary schools.

Finally, results from the research may help universities plan training for principals by informing school principals heading multicultural elementary schools of the issues surrounding school leadership and culture in an environment that is different from their culture, race, or gender. Novice principals may learn of the issues that inevitably arise in the workplace, and also realize that the most promising solutions to these issues reside there as well (Barth, 1990). Consequently, the study may be a useful resource in helping to solve issues and address implications and challenges associated with principals and school climate in multicultural elementary school settings.

Section 2: Review of the Literature

Content and Organization of the Review

The literature review provides a context to examine the leadership of principals in schools in which the majority of students and other stakeholders are multicultural or of an ethnicity other than Caucasian. Additionally, I examine the literature of leadership

models: transformational leadership, instructional leadership, and social justice leadership. The literature review identifies current gaps in the literature on these subjects by first showing that limited research studies have been conducted on principals and how they lead multicultural elementary schools. Second, the literature review demonstrates how the three leadership models contain a vacancy in identifying the race of the principal and how that vacancy affects a multicultural school population.

In an effort to clearly develop an understanding of the paucity of literature on school principals heading multicultural schools, I explored social justice leadership literature. To gain an overall understanding of leadership in elementary schools, I

examined the primary leadership theories of transformational leadership and instructional leadership. I chose these three leadership theories because social justice leadership focuses on racial and cultural differences in schools. Additionally, instructional

leadership is the main mode of leadership in the public school system, and its utility, as revealed in the literature review, provides a useful starting point for anyone interested in school leadership. Last, transformational leadership is about leaders changing traditional modes of leadership, such as those historically detailed as instructional leadership.

An understanding of how principals operate in multicultural schools can be gained by examining studies on cross-racial administration and leadership theories. The

existing bodies of literature on the topic show that although diversity in the principalship is acknowledged as important, the specific race of the principal, students, and

stakeholders is not as important.

Assumptions that Shape the Literature Review

Two assumptions shape the literature review. The first assumption is that race plays a role in the principalship. Racial background differences between principals and school populations, and the existence of race-related privilege, make race a factor in how principals lead multicultural schools. Second, principals’ leadership actions can be understood through leadership models because principals’ actions follow certain patterns that researchers have studied and defined in leadership studies.

Strategy Used to Search the Literature

I collected the literature reviewed for the study through traditional textual review and electronic retrieval methods. Electronic research included the use of four primary databases accessed through the Walden University Library. I used ERIC, EBSCO host, ProQuest, and Sage to identify pertinent journal articles. The key terms used in these searches were leadership, diversity, and principal characteristics; African American schools, leadership, and principals, and climate and culture. I selected articles for review that identified leadership practices in diverse elementary schools. I carefully reviewed all referenced literature to determine significance to the topic under study.

Literature Related to Principals Shaping School Culture

As school leaders, school principals shape and influence school culture (Barth, 2004; Blair, 2002; Davis et al., 2015; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2014; Fullan, 2008; Gladwell, 2008; Khalifa, 2012; Kruse & Gates, 2015; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015;

Richardson, 2010; Rigby, 2014; Roberts, 2008; Stone-Johnson, 2014). Similarly, researchers have documented the broader notion that leaders in general shape culture (Balyer, 2012; Davis et al., 2015; Fullan, 2008; Jones, 2007; Lambert, 2003; Neumerski, 2012; Pitre, 2015; Rigby, 2014; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Terosky, 2014; Urick & Bowers, 2014). Specific to this study, the phenomenon of principals leading schools where the dominant student and staff populations are of a different racial group from the principals is not new. Indeed, researchers showed that principals have been leading multicultural schools for more than 3 decades (Rosenberg & Simmons, 1971). However, as noted in Section 1, because of the shortage of principals in multicultural schools, researchers demonstrated that the number of principals leading multicultural schools is on the rise; a trend that is likely to continue (Snyder et al., 2009). Given this steady rise and its

projected continuation, an empirical study that examines the impact this rise may have on shaping school culture is salient. The next section discusses culture and its importance to leadership, specifically to the role of principals and their leadership effects on the culture of multicultural schools.

Organizational Culture

Organizational culture is defined as the values and beliefs that differentiate organizations (Brooks & Witherspoon-Arnold, 2013; Collins, 2001; Conrad & Serlin, 2006; DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2014; Kraft et al., 2015; Kruse & Gates, 2015; Marsh & Desai, 2012; Mullen, Harris, Pryor, & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Pollock, 2007). Getzels et al. (1963) were some of the first researchers to explore the concept of culture and leadership in education with the creation of the social system model (as cited in Hallinger & Leithwood, 1996; Marion, 2002). In

this model, researchers explored the impact of various culture levels in a system on the thinking and behavior of leaders and other organizational participants (Hallinger & Leithwood, 1996). The levels are the societal level, the group level, and the individual level (Marion, 2002). Leaders’ influence on culture varies according to different situations. For example, in new organizations, leaders are critical to the organization as they are responsible for creating the culture of the organization in the first place and to leading changes in organizational culture (Hallinger & Leithwood, 1996; Marion, 2002; Schein, 2004; Yukl, 2002).

Race/Ethnicity and Organizational Culture

The exploration of the effects of ethnic group culture is critical in a world where ethnic diversity is growing (Chong & Thomas, 1997; Holzman, 2012; Ladson-Billings, 2013; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Nevarez & Wood, 2007; Pineda & Whitehead, 1997; Ryan, 2007; Singleton, 2013; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011). For example, Pineda and Whitehead (1997) noted that in pluralistic nations, which consist of more than one subculture, the organizational members from different subcultures (also called ethnological groups) bring values and norms of their ethnological groups into the organization. Chong and Thomas (1997) conducted a study on Pakeha and Pacific Islanders in part to examine the effect of leader and follower ethnicity on leadership prototypes. Results indicated that leader prototypes are likely to differ according to ethnicity. They concluded by stating that their findings “make a powerful case for the consideration of cultural difference as an important factor in leader–follower interactions” (Chong & Thomas, 1997, p. 290).

Similarly, a recent study by Ospina and Foldy (2009) provided three categories of research devoted to the study of race/ethnicity leadership: Effects of race/ethnicity on

perceptions of leadership, effects of race/ethnicity on leadership enactments, and leaders’ approach to handling the social reality of race/ethnicity. Ospina and Foldy noted many challenges concerning the study of race and leadership, including inconsistent findings, a lack of repeated studies to determine why findings are inconsistent, and a lack of value placed on the experiences of leaders with minority racial or ethnic backgrounds. Ospina and Foldy (2009) suggested the following question for future research: “How does race– ethnicity affect perceptions of leadership?” (p. 892). Similarly, the present study

examined how the race of the principal may affect the culture of a multicultural school. A review of multiple research databases related to education, 20 years of

dissertations on the principalship, current and past peer-reviewed journals, and other sources did not produce much literature on the phenomenon. This paucity of research is another reason this investigation was necessary. A review and analysis of the limited empirical and professional literature seemed to focus on two themes that provided insights into why principals choose multicultural schools and how they may shape school culture, which was the essence of this study. The two broad themes were (a) reasons principals choose multicultural schools, which includes subthemes of intentional choice, commitment to social justice, and the search for challenge; and (b) transforming school culture, which includes subthemes of internal and external support and using political skill and will.

Themes

Reasons for choosing a multicultural school. A few researchers discussed why principals choose multicultural schools. First, principals have intentionally decided to work in these schools and have chosen to consciously engage in practices such as

reaching out to families to maximize effective school culture. Reaching out to parents was also an effort by the principals to ensure that professional development focused on sensitivity (Brezicha et al., 2015; Brislin & Yoshida, 1994; Collie, Shapka, & Perry, 2011; Davis et al., 2015; Delpit, 1995; Gladwell, 2008; Green, 2015; Le Fevre &

Robinson, 2015; Marsh & Desai, 2012; Mohan, 2007; Richardson, 2010; Roberts, 2008; Robins, Lindsey, Lindsey, & Terrell, 2002; Starratt, 2001). Not only did principals choose to work in the schools, but they also carried out their personal missions to the families and the staff. The ethics-of-care literature concerns practicing ethical

consideration and care toward minority students (Capper, 2015; Davis et al., 2015; Delpit, 1995; Gladwell, 2008; Hemphill & Vanneman, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 2013; Pitre, 2014; Richardson, 2010), and facilitates principals’ intentional choice to lead minority–majority schools. Ethics of care purports that ethics, justice, and care are human ethical responses to unethical and challenging environments.

Transforming school culture. The personal determination of principals to lead minority–majority schools and the internal and external support gained by principals were viable starting points to transform school culture. First, principals have recognized the connection between racial issues and academic achievement. Consequently, to avoid negative educational outcomes, some principals have created inclusive school cultures through instructional quality and school vision (Aydin, Sarier, & Uysal, 2013;

DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Gray & Gardiner, 2013; Hauserman & Stick, 2013; Ibrahim, Ghavifekr, Ling, Siraj, & Azeez, 2013; Mette & Scribner, 2014; Moore, 2012; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Nevarez & Wood, 2007; Nisbett, 2009; Ravitch, 2008; Thoonen et al., 2011). Through open-ended interviews, the principals in these studies indicated

they had a personal desire to be sensitive to diversity. Principals who are most interested in being sensitive are those who had experiences that made them particularly sensitive to the needs of minority students (DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Dimmock & Walker, 2005; A. E. Evans, 2007; Gardiner & Enomoto, 2006; Ladson-Billings, 2013; Kose, 2007; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Singleton, 2013; Theoharis, 2007). Therefore, the personal and distinct experiences of principals can negatively or positively determine how their leadership style affects the climate of multicultural schools.

Second, the importance of principals of diverse students embracing community members and inviting them to become partners in education by seeking out the school community, rather than waiting for community members to seek out the school, has been recognized in the literature as an important component of building internal and external support (Dimmock & Walker, 2005; Green, 2015; Kraft et al., 2015; Ryan & Rottman, 2009; Sahin, 2011; Scheurich, 1998; Theoharis, 2007; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011). Researchers established that principals should openly communicate about educational issues, offer opportunities for leadership development, and create positive community relationships (Aydin et al., 2013; Goldring et al., 2015; Hauserman & Stick, 2013: Kose, 2007; Kraft et al., 2015; Price, 2012; Riehl, 2001; Syed, 2014; Urick & Bowers, 2014; Zeigler & Ramage, 2012; Zhao, 2013). Through such open communication, principals can create a network of support throughout their communities and build better racial understanding among their students, their students’ families, and themselves.

Finally, a few researchers identified political skill and will as effective aspects of transforming school culture, with principals championing their own affirmative views of diversity with success (Davis et al., 2015; Kose, 2007; Magno & Schiff, 2010; Norte,

2001; Pitre, 2015; Price, 2012). Using their positions of authority and power, these school principals allocated resources, time, and high-priority status to issues of diversity. This prioritization, in turn, facilitated a culture of sensitivity among teachers, foregrounding the importance of diversity in school, and setting a model for how teachers should act. Several researchers (M. Foster, 2007; Giles, 2006; Hopson, Greene, Bledsoe, Villegas, & Brown, 2007; Richardson, 2010; Schutz, 2006; Warren, 2005) described the balance between high expectations and appropriate educational support of students. Educational support included organizational attitudes and organizational structures. For example, schools that discouraged tracking and embraced educational equity showed greater concern for students’ educational well-being. Other researchers (Dimmock & Walker, 2005; A. E. Evans; 2007; Furman, 2012; Gardiner & Enomoto, 2006; Hicks et al., 2012; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; Kose, 2007; Theoharis, 2008) stressed the importance of professional development as a way to encourage teachers to prepare students to become citizens who understand and attend to community, national, and global social issues.

Strengths and Limitations of the Literature

Strengths. Collectively, this literature offers several strengths that enhance understanding of why and how principals lead in multicultural elementary schools. First, the fact that principals have personal commitment and desire to lead multicultural schools is useful information because as principals recognize and acknowledge racial differences, improvement in minority achievement can be possible. Second, evidence shows that the ideas surrounding principals and how they can influence cultures of multicultural schools through political skill and will, and internal and external support can begin to make valuable change. Studies may overlook race altogether as it relates to school culture;

however, without meaningful discussion of the racial elements of school culture,

conclusions about the phenomenon of school principals shaping the culture simply cannot be made, and given that the trend of principalship in multicultural schools is rising, the significance of this type of study is obvious.

Limitations. The literature has two major limitations. First, although many researchers described the need for principals to understand the racial backgrounds and contexts of their students and their students’ families, little understanding exists of specific advice for how leaders implement plans and processes to ensure greater cross-racial understanding. Principals who recognize the need to better understand the cross-racial contexts of the communities they serve and have engaged in sense making have an advantage over those principals who may not realize the biases in their practice as they impact students and families who are of other races. Therefore, this doctoral case study aimed to offer questions that allow principals and staff members to reflect on the climate of their campuses, as well as their leadership styles and philosophies as they pertain to multicultural students, and thereby shed light on the topic at hand. Furthermore, open-ended interviews allowed for probing how to best meet the daily needs of minority and multicultural students effectively and with regard for their racial backgrounds.

A second limitation is a lack of clarity on how principals carry out the daily leadership functions of the school. Open-ended interviews provided specific insights into how principals understood or did not understand their multicultural student populations. However, limited literature on principals of multicultural schools described how leaders fulfilled the daily functions of the school and how they helped or hindered the school culture for multicultural students. The lack of understanding in the leadership of diverse

schools headed by principals is apparent (Capper, 2015; Egbo, 2009; Kendall, 2006; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Ryan, 2003; Terosky, 2014); however, this study sought to fill in the gap in the current, empirical case studies that discussed the leadership practices of a principal in a multicultural elementary school.

Implications of the Literature

The themes discussed above are critical to this study in that they augment and complement the conceptual framework described in section 1. Specifically, the themes provide a set of analytic features that facilitate a deeper understanding of the specific ways a principal may shape and influence school culture in multicultural schools. Given that culture relates directly to the leadership behavior of the principal (Brezicha et al., 2015; Fullan, 2008; Gladwell, 2008; Gray & Gardiner, 2013; Green, 2015; Lochmiller, 2016; Moore, 2012; Richardson, 2010; Roberts, 2008; Roffey, 2013; Thoonen et al., 2011; Woulfin, Donaldson, & Gonzales, 2016), this study specifically and empirically provides information on a principal who works in a multicultural school and also

provides strategies for how principals working in multicultural schools may shape school culture.

Literature on Leadership Theories in Education

The following section reviews instructional leadership as the primary model used in education. Following the discussion of the instructional-leadership model are sections on transformational leadership and leadership for social justice. I examined the leadership theories described below to bring understanding to the topic of the implications of

In sum, I discovered that all three leadership methods described in this literature review shared common themes such as significance of vision, purpose, shared efforts toward leadership, and strong elements of influence by the leader. However, as will be discussed, gaps in the literature included discussion of the implications of principals leading multicultural elementary schools and of how the role of principals’ understanding of race complicates how their leadership shapes the culture of the schools they administer.

Literature on Models of Instructional Leadership

As will be discussed later in the literature review, currently leadership is an activity aimed at fulfilling goals and aspirations through team effort (Balyer, 2012; Brezicha et al., 2015; DeMatthews, 2014; Demirtas & Ekmekyapar, 2012; Fahey, 2013; Fullan, 2005; Goodwin, 2015; Green, 2015; Murphy, 1990; Spillane, 2005; Spillane, Diamond, & Jita, 2003; Thoonen et al., 2011); however, early school-leadership approaches emphasized leaders making organizational decisions alone and delivering decisions for followers to execute. The context, as well as other individuals and aspects of the school environment, were secondary components in the framework of instructional leadership, wherein principals’ responsibilities encompassed management and leadership functions and roles.

Instructional leadership developed during the late 1970s and early 1980s, when the principal was viewed as the primary source of educational expertise (Bass, 1985; Blase, 1987; Burns, 1978; Erickson, 1964; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1984). Aimed at standardizing the practice of effective teaching, early practices of instructional leadership described principals as supervisory instructional leaders. As supervisors, school

(Glasman, 1984; Hallinger & Murphy, 1987b; Leitner, 1994). The instructional leader was strong, directive, and focused on curriculum and instruction (R. L. Andrews & Soder, 1987; Edmonds, 1979; Hallinger & Murphy, 1985; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1984). As instructional leaders, principals’ roles included maintaining high expectations for teachers and students, supervising classroom instruction, coordinating school curricula, and

monitoring student progress (Bamburg & Andrews, 1990; Barth, 1986; Bossert, Dwyer, Rowan, & Lee, 1982; Cohen & Miller, 1980; Cuban, 1984, 1988). Early literature on instructional leadership described principals as having strong backgrounds in curriculum and instruction, enabling them to improve classroom practice.

Early literature on instructional leadership. Many researchers (R. L. Andrews & Soder, 1987; Edmonds, 1979; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1984) conducted studies of instructional leadership in diverse settings, including researching students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The effective principals in the studies used their own knowledge of pedagogy to develop curriculum, provide professional development, and observe the implementation of new learning in classrooms. As instructional leaders, effective principals created positive school learning cultures with high expectations for each student. Furthermore, they used firmly established evaluation systems and

monitored student learning frequently. They continually gathered data on student progress and identified areas for remediation or enrichment. Studies demonstrated that regardless of students’ family backgrounds and socioeconomic factors, schools could and should educate all students to high levels of academic achievement (Glasman, 1984; Goldring & Pasternak, 1994; Hallinger, Bickman, & Davis, 1996; Hallinger & Murphy, 1987a; Heck, 1992; Heck & Marcoulides, 1990; Krug, 1992; Leitner, 1994). Historically,

instructional leadership, while a practice conducted solely by the principal, focused on achievement of all student learners.

Conceptual models of instructional leadership. Many conceptual models demonstrate instructional leadership. Three prevailing conceptualizations of instructional leadership will be reviewed in this section: The framework of the

instructional-management model by Hallinger and Murphy (1985), Murphy’s (1990) instructional leadership comprehensive-framework model, and Weber’s (1996) instructional-leadership model. I describe the models along with work by other researchers who espoused similar perspectives on dimensions of instructional leadership.

In developing the framework for the instructional-management model, Hallinger and Murphy (1985) examined the instructional-leadership behaviors of 10 elementary principals in one school district. They collected information from principals, school staff, and central-administration staff through a common questionnaire on

instructional-leadership behaviors. They also used other data such as observation notes, narratives from the principals, and faculty-meeting minutes and agendas. From the questionnaire, Hallinger and Murphy created a framework of instructional management with three dimensions and 11 job descriptors. Hallinger and Murphy used the 11 job descriptors to create an appraisal instrument of principal instructional-management behavior called the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale. The three dimensions developed by Hallinger and Murphy are described next.

Defining school mission. An organization’s mission establishes its purpose (Brown et al., 2011; DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Fullan, 2005; Green, 2015; Greer, Searby, & Thoma, 2014; Hallinger & Murphy, 1985; Roberts & Pruitt, 2003; Sebastian &

Allensworth, 2012; Terosky, 2014). Once the mission is set, it should play a critical role in all aspects of the daily work life of a principal. Its importance should be reflected in the principal’s behavior.

Managing instructional improvement. Managing instructional improvement involves working alongside teachers in areas related to curriculum and instruction by supervising and evaluating instruction, coordinating the curriculum, and monitoring the progress of students (Brezicha et al., 2015; Bryk, Lee, & Holland, 1993; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Furman, 2012; Goldring & Rallis, 1993; Hallinger & Murphy, 1985; Hicks et al., 2012; D. Johnson, 1990; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; Mendels & Mitgang, 2013; Pazey & Cole, 2013; Roffey, 2013; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Thoonen et al., 2011; Williams & Johnson, 2013). Instructional leaders provide instructional support to teachers, monitor classroom instruction through classroom visits, and align classroom practice with school goals (Corcoran & Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 1995; Fullan, 2005; Hallinger & Murphy, 1985; Reeves, 2005; Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001). Furthermore, effective principals must be visible in classrooms and make student success central to their work by paying attention to and communicating about instruction,

curriculum, and student mastery of learning objectives (Hallinger & Murphy, 1985). Instructional leadership has become more participative in nature, with principals becoming participants in the learning process, aiming to shape and encourage the implementation of effective learning models in their schools. For instance, effective instructional leaders arrange for and participate in professional development and staff training. Additionally, as instructional leaders they facilitate collaboration because they

understand that through team work, trust, and school-wide focus, student learning will improve.

Promoting school climate. Successful instructional leaders understand the importance of establishing clear learning goals and facilitating a positive school climate. As previously mentioned, principals of high-achieving schools emphasize the

development of a clear mission and goals for learning (Balyer, 2012; Demirtas & Ekmekyapar, 2012; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Leithwood & Riehl, 2003; Muhammad & Hollie, 2012; O’Malley & Capper, 2015; Price, 2012). Principals couple high

expectations for teachers and students with providing emotional support for teachers and fostering positive interpersonal relationships with all stakeholders. Principals also promote positive learning climates by protecting instructional time, promoting professional development, and maintaining high visibility(Fullan, 2005; Hallinger & Murphy, 1985; Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2012; Mendels & Mitgang, 2013; Muhammad & Hollie, 2012; Price, 2012; O’Malley & Capper, 2015; Woulfin et al., 2016). Instructional leaders can accomplish the school mission, despite challenges, by promoting a school climate that sends messages that speak to the mission and instructional goals for all students.

Murphy’s instructional-leadership comprehensive-framework model. Using research findings from effective schools, staff development, school improvement, and organizational-change literature, Murphy (1990) provided a review of instructional leadership and developed a framework for instructional leadership. The framework consists of four dimensions of instructional leadership, further delineated into 16 different roles or behaviors. The four dimensions of the instructional leader are developing mission

and goals, managing the educational-production function, promoting an academic-learning climate, and developing a supportive work environment. Each of the four dimensions consists of roles or behaviors that comprise the dimension.

First, developing a mission and goals is fundamental in creating a sense of shared purpose and linking efforts in the school around a common vision (Donaldson, 2007; Fullan, 2005; Murphy, 1990). Murphy (1990) subdivided the dimension into two major roles or behaviors of the principal: framing school goals and communicating those goals. Framing school goals encompasses setting goals that emphasize student achievement for all students, incorporating data on past and current student performance, and including staff responsibilities for achieving the goals. Communicating goals frequently, formally and informally, to students, parents, and teachers stresses the importance that school goals guide the activities of the school (Comer, Haynes, Joyner, & Ben-Avie, 1996; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Goddard, 2003; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; Marsh & Desai, 2012; Price, 2012; Thoonen et al., 2011; Williams & Johnson, 2013; Zeigler & Ramage, 2012).

Second, managing the educational-production function of the school as a

dimension describes the management behaviors of the principal. Hence, the instructional leader promotes quality instruction by conducting teacher conferences and evaluations, visiting classrooms, providing specific suggestions and feedback on the teaching and learning process, and determining teacher assignments in the best interest of student learning (DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014; Goldstein, 2003; Marzano, 2001; Murphy, 1990; Price, 2012; Spillane, 2005; Teddlie & Stringfield, 1985; Urick & Bowers, 2014). Furthermore, the principal allocates and protects instructional time with school policies

and procedures. The principal works with teachers to coordinate the curriculum by matching school goals and objectives with state standards, assessments, and district curriculum (Brown et al., 2011; DeMatthews, 2014; Fullan, 2005; Hicks et al., 2012; Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2012; Mendels & Mitgang, 2013; Murphy, 1990; Spillane, 2005; Spillane et al., 2003).

Third, promoting a learning climate refers to the behaviors of the principal that influence the norms and attitudes of teachers, students, and parents in a school (Brezicha et al., 2015; Darling-Hammond, 1998; Fullan, 2005; Hicks et al., 2012; Murphy, 1990; Pitre, 2015; Sergiovanni, 1996; B. S. Young, 1980). Principals, who are the primary agents for facilitating the learning climate, carry out the development of a school learning climate conducive to teaching and learning by maintaining positive expectations and standards, by ensuring high visibility, by providing incentives for teachers and students, and by carrying out professional development (Darling-Hammond, 1998; Fullan, 2005; Sergiovanni, 1996; B. S. Young, 1980).

Fourth, the final dimension of Murphy’s (1990) framework, developing a supportive work environment, specifies how a principal establishes organizational structures and propagates them to support the teaching and learning process (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Fullan, 1997; A. Hargreaves & Fink, 2006; Senge, 1990). The principal creates a safe and orderly learning environment, provides opportunities for meaningful student involvement, develops staff collaboration and cohesion, secures outside resources in support of school goals, and forges links between the home and school (Balyer, 2012; Beaudoin, 2011; Collie et al., 2011; Daly, Der-Martirosian, Ong-Dean, Park, & Wishard-Guerra, 2011; Darling-Hammond, 1998; DuFour, 2004; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Hicks et

al., 2012; Hulpia, Devos, & Van Keer, 2011; Murphy, 1990; Sergiovanni, 1996; Spillane, 2005; Urick & Bowers, 2014). All stakeholders are instrumental in supporting the school environment as communicated, facilitated, and expected by the school principal.

Weber’s (1996) instructional-leadership model. Weber (1996) identified five essential domains of instructional leadership: defining the school’s mission, managing curriculum and instruction, promoting a positive learning climate, observing and improving instruction, and assessing the instructional program. First, Weber described defining the school’s mission as a process of cooperation and reflective thinking to create a mission that is clear and honest. Several researchers also believed that the mission of the school should bind the staff, students, and parents to a common vision (Barth, 2001; Collie et al., 2011; Donaldson, 2007; T. J. Evans, 1996; A. Hargreaves & Fink, 2006; Nelson & Guerra, 2014; Rigby, 2014; Sergiovanni & Starratt, 1998; Terosky, 2014; Woestman & Wasonga, 2015). The instructional leader offers stakeholders the opportunity to discuss values and expectations for the school. Together they work to create a shared mission for the school.

Second, managing curriculum and instruction must be consistent with the mission of the school (Donaldson, 2007; Eaker & Stantas, 2007; Hicks et al., 2012; Marzano, 2001; Pitre, 2014; Weber, 1996). The instructional leader’s wealth of instructional practices and classroom supervision gives teachers the needed resources to provide students with opportunities to succeed. The principal helps teachers use current research in superior practices and instructional strategies to reach school goals for student

Third, leaders promote a positive learning climate by communicating instructional goals, establishing high expectations for performance, establishing an orderly learning environment with clear discipline expectations, and working to increase teacher commitment to the school (Balyer, 2012; Demirtas & Ekmekyapar, 2012; Donaldson, 2007; DuFour, 2004; Fullan, 2005; Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2012; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Syed, 2014; Weber, 1996; Zeigler & Ramage, 2012). Promoting a positive learning climate comprises the expectations and attitudes of the whole school community.

Fourth, observing and improving instruction starts with the principal establishing trusting and respectful relationships with the school staff. Weber (1996) proposed that observations are opportunities for professional interactions. These interactions provide professional-development opportunities for the observer and for the one being observed. In other words, a reciprocal relationship develops through which both parties gain valuable information for professional growth. Principals enhance the experience by emphasizing research as the foundation for initiating teaching strategies, remediation, and differentiation of the lessons (Barth, 1990; Darling-Hammond, 1997; Donaldson, 2007; Fullan, 2004).

Fifth, assessing the instructional program is essential for its improvement (Weber, 1996). The successful instructional leader initiates and contributes to the plan, design, administration, and analysis of assessments. These assessments contribute to evaluating the effectiveness of the curriculum (Donaldson, 2007; DuFour, 2005; Marzano, 2001; Weber, 1996).

The concept of instructional leadership has been evolving. Two general categories related to the dimensions of instructional leadership emerged from the three general

models described and the literature surrounding instructional leadership: shared instructional leadership and collective learning. These two categories are discussed below.

Shared instructional leadership. Instructional leaders of reputedly successful schools use the expertise in their school community to facilitate the work of improving teacher practices and increasing student achievement (Donaldson, 2008; Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015; B. Levin & Clowes, 1991; Marks & Louis, 1997; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Mendels & Mitgang, 2013; Muhammad & Hollie, 2012; Pazey & Cole, 2013; Robertson & Randolph, 1995; Roffey, 2013; Williams & Johnson, 2013; Zhao, 2013). School principals create a culture of learning when they are aware of the most current theories and practices of effective schooling and create situations in which teachers can discuss current theories and practices on a regular basis (Fink, 2003; Fullan, 2004; Halbert & Kaser, 2006; D. H. Hargreaves, 2003; Marzano et al., 2005; Price, 2012; Santamaría, 2014; Stone-Johnson, 2014). The current roles of administrators as

instructional leaders include understanding the learning needs of individuals, facilitating the kind of interactive social environments that will motivate individuals to learn, and ensuring that adequate resources are available to support the learning (Emihovich & Battaglia, 2000; Glover, 2009; A. Hargreaves & Fink, 2006; Kruse & Gates, 2015; Marzano et al., 2005; McCray & Beachum, 2011; Stein & Nelson, 2003; Thoonen et al., 2011).

The research yields several examples of shared instructional-leadership practices. First, in a study of more than 100 elementary schools in the United States, researchers found that leadership responsibility was usually distributed across three to seven formally